Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review)

[Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se>]

Title: Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review)

Den 2009-06-11 00.18, skrev "CE Whitehead" <cewcathar at hotmail.com>:

Re. ABNF for variant subtags:

> > All that is fine, but I expected something in the table like:
> >  
> > "(DIGIT 3*7 alphanum)

The (DIGIT 3alphanum) part of your suggestion is (obviously) covered by
the (DIGIT 3alphanum) part in ABNF. The (DIGIT 4*7alphanum) part of your
suggestion is covered by   5*8alphanum   in the ABNF. The 5*8alphanum also
covers variants that start with a letter. Replacing (DIGIT 3alphanum) by
(DIGIT 3*7alphanum) would just introduce needless ambiguity in the grammar.

    /kent k